10 ms·

What you just described is an idea that's around intellectual circles about the nature of power in this era. It's the idea behind the book "Ipnocrazia" (not yet

What you just described is an idea that's around intellectual circles about the nature of power in this era. It's the idea behind the book "Ipnocrazia" (not yet released), which gained fame around europe and south america. Citing from the top of my head: "Simulation isn't imitating the real anymore, simulation precedes the real" If I understand it right, tragedy is first simulated. Once the simulation is bought by the population, it gives the ruling class a reason to act how they really want to act, and the tragedy is made real. In other words. It's population control without coercion. A narrative puts people in a trance (they're hypnotized), inhibiting their cognitive capacity. The narrative is the simulation. The goal is to make people fearful and disoriented so they delegate their cognitive capacity to "illuminated" rulers, accepting the simulation as real. If i were to put it in real terms. Let's spread the narrative of an incoming world war 3. Once it's settled, the population will just accept world war 3 as a matter of fact, unavoidable. This would allow us, the ruler class, to extend trump's presidency even beyond.

whattheheckheck 2y ago
Us? Lol
selimthegrim 2y ago
Isn’t that Baudrillard?
- williamcotton 2y ago
  Yup, sounds like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation
Retric 2y ago
That assumes a level of structure and control to society that simply doesn’t exist. I don’t know why people so often fall into the trap of assuming someone or something is running things, but chaos seems to be anathema to how people perceive the world. God(s), fate, luck, karma, magic etc have been supplanted by the everything from hidden cabals, aliens, etc but I don’t think the underlying psychology is really any different.
- ranyume 2y ago
  The world is chaotic, but that doesn't mean power is symmetric between everyone.
  - Retric 2y ago
    > In other words. It's population control without coercion. Power asymmetry doesn’t imply control. Exxon has orders of magnitude more influence on the price of gas than I do, but it’s influence not control.
- JoeyJoJoJr 2y ago
  I think you are making some assumptions there. All of the things the parent comment mentioned can come about through emergent behaviors. Every actor operating independently yet influenced towards a certain direction via the incentives/disincentives that the system provides them.
  - Retric 2y ago
    > population control without coercion Isn’t how you describe an emergent phenomena, a flock of birds is the thing that moves it doesn’t make sense to say it’s controlled.
    - JoeyJoJoJr 2y ago
      Well I don’t think what the OP is describing is a puppet master pulling strings. There are definitely individuals pushing their own agendas to gain control over masses, which obviously has emergent outcomes.
      - Retric 2y ago
        Contradictory agendas has emergent properties, but the outcome isn’t under any specific groups control.
theshaper 2y ago
Funny how what the book talks about… is exactly what’s happening. Kind of meta. The author doesn’t exist. The whole essay is fake—or a “philosophical experiment”[1], according to Andrea Colamedici, the real italian author behind it, who was supposedly just the translator. And those words aren’t his either. They came from two AI platforms (still unnamed). It’s been a scandal in publishing, and in all the universities and newspapers that praised it as a fresh way to understand the present. Now, of course, intellectuals and journalists are justifying “the intellectual debate the book sparked”, asking if these new “philosophical entities” are the start of a new wave of “hybrid works...” and so on. Well. They’ve basically discovered "vibe philosophizing": feeling deep truths without knowing where they come from or why they sound right. [1] More: https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun-the-supposed-philosopher-behind-the-hypnocracy-theory-does-not-exist-and-is-a-product-of-artificial-intelligence.html https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun...
- ranyume 2y ago
  I'm not sure why you say it's a scandal. The author worked with the publishing company from the start, and from the start the intention was to "unveil" the truth to make an impact. > And those words aren’t his either. They came from two AI platforms (still unnamed). According to interviews, he used AI platforms in a very specific way that couldn't be called "vibe philosophizing". It seems he treated the AI as a mirror instead of a system that would give him answers. I'm waiting for an extended interview this sunday, but if I understand it right he used AI as a tool for self-reflection and self-questioning.
  - theshaper 2y ago
    > I'm not sure why you say it's a scandal. The author worked with the publishing company from the start, and from the start the intention was to "unveil" the truth to make an impact. That just means he didn’t lie alone. They lied as a group. They lied to the newspapers that interviewed Jianwei Xun, they lied to the bookstores that sold a non-existent author, they lied to readers and academics, they violated the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, which considers it a serious offense to fail to label AI-generated text, video, or audio. The book doesn’t clarify this in any of its editions.[1] I get your point about the marketing strategy. That doesn’t change the fact that it was a lie. Several newspapers have already retracted or pulled their original articles about the “clever stunt” by the Italian author. New spanish editions will now include an explanation of the actual writing process (with AI), as well as the mixed identity behind the author's name.[2] A scandal. And yes, I think the experiment is interesting. But they lied, not just my opinion. That’s what every newspapers who interviewed a ghost is now saying. > According to interviews, he used AI platforms in a very specific way that couldn't be called "vibe philosophizing" I was referring to the intellectuals now justifying the experiment of working with AI. (They’ve basically discovered “vibe philosophizing”) I wasn’t referring to him. He clearly knew what he was doing. > It seems he treated the AI as a mirror instead of a system that would give him answers. Right. Except… I’m not the one saying: - “Jianwei Xun emerged in late 2024 as a distributed philosophical entity born from the collaborative interaction between human intelligence and artificial intelligence systems.” - “Xun's true nature as a hybrid intellectual construct…” That’s from the author’s own official page.[3] [1] https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun-the-supposed-philosopher-behind-the-hypnocracy-theory-does-not-exist-and-is-a-product-of-artificial-intelligence.html https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun... [2] https://www.lanacion.com.ar/tecnologia/jianwei-xun-autor-de-hipnocracia-era-el-filosofo-de-moda-pero-resulto-ser-un-invento-de-la-nid07042025/ https://www.lanacion.com.ar/tecnologia/jianwei-xun-autor-de-... [3] https://jianweixun.com/ https://jianweixun.com/
caseyy 2y ago
It sounds a bit like shifting the Overton Window to manufacture consent. I'm sure some people probably tried to do it.
- ranyume 2y ago
  Hypnocracy would be a societal structure in which democracy and free choice is an illusion. The population's perception of reality would be manufactured by the ruling class without coercion or persuasion. The Overton Window only makes sense when there's free choice.
trod1234 2y ago
Well you clearly do not know what you are talking about. That's grade A hash your smoking, not the cheap stuff but the premium 5th Generation Warfare propaganda. Its vile, and without any rational basis. You misunderstand critical things, and are quite wrong if you actually believe this trite garbage. A narrative doesn't put people into a trance (i.e they're hypnotized). Torture through its elements, structuring, and clustering puts people into an involuntary hypnotic state, the same now as it did back during Mao. Evil people have made the science to do this simple, to do to any one anywhere without them largely knowing. The goal is to break people mentally where they are no longer capable of rational thought, which prevents them from holding their leaders to account among other things. Cognitive capacity is reduced as a simple matter of exposure to the psychological stresses induced by torture, prior to psychological break. When you get more than 2/3 of the population broken, bad things happen. If I were to put it in real terms for you, at that point you have made an existential threat with a nuclear power, and even worse... there is a very real possibility that the person deciding whether to push that button or not and end everything has a mental break, with a great chance at it falling into the second group of psychosis seeking annihilation; in other words you have induced that powerful person to become an insane person, with their hand on the button, who will then press it because they aren't in their right mind because you've made it so. It doesn't matter if the threat China poses is real, people near psychotic breaks jump at shadows, and it doesn't matter if this was done indirectly either. It is also becoming pretty clear that setting up the dynamics where you fail to seize power under communism causes failures to Fascism, creating these problems as well. This is what blind delusional evil people fail to see. They don't think through the sequence of actions they put into motion with any kind of objectivity just because something is unthinkable. The people pushing narratives like what you suggest, are the same people torturing everyone. The outcomes show they want only one thing, all life on the planet to be dead, yourself included. If you look carefully at who did what historically to push this forward, the trends are clear, and the delusional court disaster until they no longer can. Its a fundamental disadvantage they have, that willful self-induced blindness to reality. You really need to develop your skills in breaking down false narratives and discard them rather than accept it as truth. Lest you want to join them in their endeavor to destroy everyone and everything anyone cares about.

whattheheckheck 2y ago

Us? Lol

selimthegrim 2y ago

Isn’t that Baudrillard?

williamcotton 2y ago
Yup, sounds like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation

Retric 2y ago

That assumes a level of structure and control to society that simply doesn’t exist. I don’t know why people so often fall into the trap of assuming someone or something is running things, but chaos seems to be anathema to how people perceive the world. God(s), fate, luck, karma, magic etc have been supplanted by the everything from hidden cabals, aliens, etc but I don’t think the underlying psychology is really any different.

ranyume 2y ago
The world is chaotic, but that doesn't mean power is symmetric between everyone.
- Retric 2y ago
  > In other words. It's population control without coercion. Power asymmetry doesn’t imply control. Exxon has orders of magnitude more influence on the price of gas than I do, but it’s influence not control.
JoeyJoJoJr 2y ago
I think you are making some assumptions there. All of the things the parent comment mentioned can come about through emergent behaviors. Every actor operating independently yet influenced towards a certain direction via the incentives/disincentives that the system provides them.
- Retric 2y ago
  > population control without coercion Isn’t how you describe an emergent phenomena, a flock of birds is the thing that moves it doesn’t make sense to say it’s controlled.
  - JoeyJoJoJr 2y ago
    Well I don’t think what the OP is describing is a puppet master pulling strings. There are definitely individuals pushing their own agendas to gain control over masses, which obviously has emergent outcomes.
    - Retric 2y ago
      Contradictory agendas has emergent properties, but the outcome isn’t under any specific groups control.

theshaper 2y ago

Funny how what the book talks about… is exactly what’s happening. Kind of meta. The author doesn’t exist. The whole essay is fake—or a “philosophical experiment”[1], according to Andrea Colamedici, the real italian author behind it, who was supposedly just the translator. And those words aren’t his either. They came from two AI platforms (still unnamed). It’s been a scandal in publishing, and in all the universities and newspapers that praised it as a fresh way to understand the present. Now, of course, intellectuals and journalists are justifying “the intellectual debate the book sparked”, asking if these new “philosophical entities” are the start of a new wave of “hybrid works...” and so on. Well. They’ve basically discovered "vibe philosophizing": feeling deep truths without knowing where they come from or why they sound right. [1] More: https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun-the-supposed-philosopher-behind-the-hypnocracy-theory-does-not-exist-and-is-a-product-of-artificial-intelligence.html https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun...

ranyume 2y ago
I'm not sure why you say it's a scandal. The author worked with the publishing company from the start, and from the start the intention was to "unveil" the truth to make an impact. > And those words aren’t his either. They came from two AI platforms (still unnamed). According to interviews, he used AI platforms in a very specific way that couldn't be called "vibe philosophizing". It seems he treated the AI as a mirror instead of a system that would give him answers. I'm waiting for an extended interview this sunday, but if I understand it right he used AI as a tool for self-reflection and self-questioning.
- theshaper 2y ago
  > I'm not sure why you say it's a scandal. The author worked with the publishing company from the start, and from the start the intention was to "unveil" the truth to make an impact. That just means he didn’t lie alone. They lied as a group. They lied to the newspapers that interviewed Jianwei Xun, they lied to the bookstores that sold a non-existent author, they lied to readers and academics, they violated the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, which considers it a serious offense to fail to label AI-generated text, video, or audio. The book doesn’t clarify this in any of its editions.[1] I get your point about the marketing strategy. That doesn’t change the fact that it was a lie. Several newspapers have already retracted or pulled their original articles about the “clever stunt” by the Italian author. New spanish editions will now include an explanation of the actual writing process (with AI), as well as the mixed identity behind the author's name.[2] A scandal. And yes, I think the experiment is interesting. But they lied, not just my opinion. That’s what every newspapers who interviewed a ghost is now saying. > According to interviews, he used AI platforms in a very specific way that couldn't be called "vibe philosophizing" I was referring to the intellectuals now justifying the experiment of working with AI. (They’ve basically discovered “vibe philosophizing”) I wasn’t referring to him. He clearly knew what he was doing. > It seems he treated the AI as a mirror instead of a system that would give him answers. Right. Except… I’m not the one saying: - “Jianwei Xun emerged in late 2024 as a distributed philosophical entity born from the collaborative interaction between human intelligence and artificial intelligence systems.” - “Xun's true nature as a hybrid intellectual construct…” That’s from the author’s own official page.[3] [1] https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun-the-supposed-philosopher-behind-the-hypnocracy-theory-does-not-exist-and-is-a-product-of-artificial-intelligence.html https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun... [2] https://www.lanacion.com.ar/tecnologia/jianwei-xun-autor-de-hipnocracia-era-el-filosofo-de-moda-pero-resulto-ser-un-invento-de-la-nid07042025/ https://www.lanacion.com.ar/tecnologia/jianwei-xun-autor-de-... [3] https://jianweixun.com/ https://jianweixun.com/

caseyy 2y ago

It sounds a bit like shifting the Overton Window to manufacture consent. I'm sure some people probably tried to do it.

ranyume 2y ago
Hypnocracy would be a societal structure in which democracy and free choice is an illusion. The population's perception of reality would be manufactured by the ruling class without coercion or persuasion. The Overton Window only makes sense when there's free choice.

trod1234 2y ago

Well you clearly do not know what you are talking about. That's grade A hash your smoking, not the cheap stuff but the premium 5th Generation Warfare propaganda. Its vile, and without any rational basis. You misunderstand critical things, and are quite wrong if you actually believe this trite garbage. A narrative doesn't put people into a trance (i.e they're hypnotized). Torture through its elements, structuring, and clustering puts people into an involuntary hypnotic state, the same now as it did back during Mao. Evil people have made the science to do this simple, to do to any one anywhere without them largely knowing. The goal is to break people mentally where they are no longer capable of rational thought, which prevents them from holding their leaders to account among other things. Cognitive capacity is reduced as a simple matter of exposure to the psychological stresses induced by torture, prior to psychological break. When you get more than 2/3 of the population broken, bad things happen. If I were to put it in real terms for you, at that point you have made an existential threat with a nuclear power, and even worse... there is a very real possibility that the person deciding whether to push that button or not and end everything has a mental break, with a great chance at it falling into the second group of psychosis seeking annihilation; in other words you have induced that powerful person to become an insane person, with their hand on the button, who will then press it because they aren't in their right mind because you've made it so. It doesn't matter if the threat China poses is real, people near psychotic breaks jump at shadows, and it doesn't matter if this was done indirectly either. It is also becoming pretty clear that setting up the dynamics where you fail to seize power under communism causes failures to Fascism, creating these problems as well. This is what blind delusional evil people fail to see. They don't think through the sequence of actions they put into motion with any kind of objectivity just because something is unthinkable. The people pushing narratives like what you suggest, are the same people torturing everyone. The outcomes show they want only one thing, all life on the planet to be dead, yourself included. If you look carefully at who did what historically to push this forward, the trends are clear, and the delusional court disaster until they no longer can. Its a fundamental disadvantage they have, that willful self-induced blindness to reality. You really need to develop your skills in breaking down false narratives and discard them rather than accept it as truth. Lest you want to join them in their endeavor to destroy everyone and everything anyone cares about.